MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084693147 · doi:10.5539/ies.v5n6p99

Successful Learning of Academic Word List via MALL: Mobile Assisted Language Learning

2012· article· en· W2084693147 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularyVocabulary developmentTest (biology)Mathematics educationPsychologyAcademic yearVocabulary learningForeign languageWord (group theory)Significant differenceControl (management)Computer scienceTeaching methodArtificial intelligenceLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile phones as new addition to information and communication technologies have created new ways to help learners in the process of foreign language learning. Given the importance of academic vocabularies for university students, this study tried to investigate the effectiveness of SMS on Iranian university students’ vocabulary learning and retention. To this end forty five university freshman students with upper intermediate proficiency level were chosen to take part in this study. During 16 weeks of experiment, the participants of the experimental group (N = 28) were taught 320 head words from the Academic Word List (Coxhead, 2000) via SMS. During the same period of time the participants of the control group (N=17) were taught the same words by using dictionary. At the end, both groups were given a vocabulary test from Academic Word List, to see the effect of SMS on their vocabulary learning and the scores of each group were compared employing an independent t-test. The result of the t-test showed both groups had improved in the post- test. Although there was not any significant difference between the groups in the post- test, the result of the delayed post- test showed that SMS had more significant effect on vocabulary retention compared to using dictionary, and the experimental group outperformed the control group. The result of this study can have pedagogical implication for language teachers, in that they can use SMS as a useful way to help their students to retain vocabularies in their long term memory.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it